Minutes attached. https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/minutes-20060518/en/1 -- Andreas Savva Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd OGSA Teleconference - 18 May 2006 ================================= * Participants Mike Behrens (R2AD, LLC) Dona Dickinson (Northrop Grumman) Donal Fellows (UoM) Chris Jordan (SDSC) Hiro Kishimoto (Fujitsu) Tom Maguire (EMC) Andreas Savva (Fujitsu) David Snelling (Fujitsu) Ellen Stokes (IBM) Jem Treadwell (HP) Jay Unger (IBM) Minutes: Andreas Savva * April 27 Minutes - approved with no changes * Action item review (Only items with updates are listed below.) - Ellen will do an example of a cluster (e.g., the glue cluster model) and the 'red' to 'blue' mapping for it - Similar example produced as part of GGF17 document produced by Ellen. - (CLOSED) - Hiro and Jun will look at what needs to be provided as a set of common component models and make a proposal to the group. - Hiro and Jun produced some initial material which they presented at GGF. They will continue refining them and will review in future calls. - (CLOSED) - Manuel & Andrew to determine where/when to hold standard hierarchical namespaces discussions. - Chris Jordan gave a status update: A revised draft was produced by GFS-WG before GGF17. It was reviewed at GGF17. - Will give some time to OGSA-Naming-WG and OGSA-Data-WG to review and comment and if agreement is reached to submit to GGF Editor - Agreed to review document on next OGSA call (next Monday) - There is a need to check Andrew's and Manuel's availability - (CLOSED) - Steven Newhouse to ask Jennifer Schopf on the status of the GIN modeling document. - Obsolete. - (CLOSED) * GGF17 review - Postponed minutes approval: the Information Model minutes have not been uploaded yet and many people have not had a chance to read the EMS minutes yet. ** OGSA & Alternative Architectures session - Andreas has asked the panel organizer to upload the slides. One idea is to treat them as public comments to OGSA 1.5. - Clarified that OGSA-WG still has to get separate permission to do so. - It was an interesting panel. It was good to hear the opinions of people not directly involved in OGSA. - Despite the title there was really no discussion of an alternative architecture. It would be interesting to actually talk about alternatives that are not just 'plain web services'. - OGSA also seems to have more potential support within GGF. Dave Snelling will explore this more. * Roadmap 1.1 Jem cannot take on new work at this time though he will continue to be involved in the WG. A call for volunteers for Roadmap editor resulted in three people volunteering to help out. - Agreed to make a final choice next call (Monday) - Once a selection is made there should be a discussion on what needs to be done, how to hand over work, and how to start working on the document. - Agreed on having a separate call between current and next editors to hand over work and assign responsibilites. Jem has a list of things that should be done for the next version and he will share it with the next editor. For example, what is the relation with the GGF live-charter (is design team output properly represented on the live-charter; the live-charter does not have dependencies recorded---too complex; and so on.) Hiro said that a Gap analysis section might be a good addition to the Roadmap document. * OGSA & Glossary 1.5 - Public comment period ended May 9 with no comments. Since then Jem has uploaded some comments from Olegario; and Andreas has put a comment about the 'Alternative Architectures' panel--but still need permission of presenters to use their slides as comments. - Put the Glossary again on next Monday's call, if agenda allows. - Agreed to ask particular people to review and comment: - Ian Foster (Andreas to ask) - Jeff Frey (Jay to ask) - Marvin Theimer (Hiro to ask) * OGSA Security Profiles They are in public comment. There is one comment from Marty Humphrey so far. * Webcast Jem has received feedback and will forward it out to the OGSA list * F2F Planning Discussed using Google Calendar to manage OGSA-WG schedule and planning for F2F. - Andreas will create an OGSA-WG calendar by Monday. Seed it with some known events - Set it up to send calendar invitations to the ogsa-wg list (so needs to have a gmail account) to make it easy for people to register events in the private calendars. - Allow people to subscribe to it (and publish to it). Also support a completely public view not requiring having a google account. Discussed possible dates for summer F2F. - End of june, before of after HPDC in Europe is one possibility that was rejected in the past. - First option: Week of July 17 at Chicago - Possible for most people on the call - (Donal cannot make July at all) - Hiro/Jay to ask Ian Foster and Steve Tuecke whether they can attend. - Chosing Chicago in order to get more Globus participation. Chris Jordan will also ask his Globus contacts if they can participate. - Tried to determine a second option in August but there was no consensus. Many people plan to be on holiday. Actions: - Hiro to do the usual Zoomerang - Andreas to set up a Google calendar * OASIS SDD TC report Hiro reported on the SDD F2F: - The minutes and related materials are available from the SDD TC site (see also Hiro's email on the list). - Identified and discussed overlap with ACS, CDL, and partly with OGSA EMS, JSDL. - SDD TC decided to base their specification on the IBM/Macrovision submission - IUDD V2. And this is a lot different from the GGF specs. - They did agree to converge this spec with the ACS specification. This effort looks like 'low-hanging fruit'. - They are interested in the resource requirements in JSDL and the information model work done in OGSA-WG. - There are considerable problems with CDDLM stemming from different models (e.g., different lifecycle model) - They are interested in some parts of CDL and may borrow ideas but SDD V1 is likely to be very different. - It is a good sign that they are interested in working with us on converging the various specifications. One unclear issue from Hiro's explanation is the extent to which the SDD (IUDD) spec will try to duplicate existing descriptions. (Is it a 'collector' of existing descriptions or does it duplicate and replace existing descriptors?) - Some degree of 'denormalization' (information existing in the native package also appearing in the /canonicalized meta-data description/ in SDD) is not a problem. But if the intention is to replace all existing deployers/installers they are likely to run into a host of other (political) problems. - Since it is unlikely to have a single deployment descriptor there is a need to make sure that kind of thinking is incorporated.